User talk:Paine Ellsworth/Archive 11

Thank you very much,

TheChampionMan1234, for this notification! It is hoped that my rationale for keeping and for not renaming this specifically name-formatted subcategory of Category:Redirects from non-English-language terms will meet with your approval. – Paine

  19:00, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Re: Template:Testcases page header

Hello,

• https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3ATestcases_page_header&diff=629082496&oldid=625450950

(omit interference between notice box and TOC)

What interference did you see..? Regards, Sardanaphalus (talk) 09:48, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Sardanaphalus – the interference took place when editors who use a large font to view pages went to a testcases page. The floated testcases-notice box hovered over part of the TOC, so as to cover some of the words and make topics unreadable on the pages I viewed. The only way to make the TOCs readable was to omit the floating of the notice box. I thought it better for it to be above the TOC rather than below it, and most certainly better than floating over it to obscure the headers' words. I have added this explanation to the template's talk page. – Paine 

To editor Sardanaphalus: Hi again – first, please forgive me for cluttering up your question and my response, possibly clouding the issue. I have placed those superfluous concerns below under a subheader. Next, in regard to your helpful template, while my main concern was for those editors like myself who have to use their browsers' largest font to read Wikipedia, I also had another accessibility issue in mind, that of mobile devices. I'm not really sure if mobile Wikipedia even makes TOCs appear, but if they do appear, then they were likely obscured there, as well. Under normal circumstances, though, the template very nicely made the TOC appear beside the Testcases box. I just wish there were a way to do so without floating the box over top of the TOC. Joys! – Paine  03:48, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Diffs and oldids

btw Sardanaphalus, how did you come up with the above URL that takes us directly to my edit, when the normal bare URL and the {{diff}} template take us to your previous edit, which has the same oldid number? I have raised this at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 131#Diff number. – Paine 

Okay, I see how one gets that URL – just by using the diff from the history page; however, it still does not explain why the two edits, yours and mine, have the same oldid number of 625450950. If "next" is used in the Diff template rather than "prev", then it takes us to my most recent edit, but use of "prev" take us to your previous edit. That seems to be the only difference – the oldid number is the same for both edits. Curiouser and curiouser, as Alice might quip. – Paine 

Either one or both of the &diff= and &oldid= parameters may be specified. Both can take numeric values, but when both are used together, &diff= also recognises certain keywords.

If &diff= is used alone, a specific revision is displayed, with a diff at the top which compares that revision with the previous revision.

If &oldid= is used alone, a specific revision is displayed, without a diff at the top.

If &diff= and &oldid= are used together (they may be given in either order), there are four ways of doing it.

When both are numeric, those two revisions are compared and the revision displayed below the diff is that specified by the &diff= parameter. The two revisions need not be consecutive, but the later revision number needs to be in the &diff= with the earlier one in &oldid= - if they are exchanged, a backwards comparison is made.

When both parameters are used together, the &diff= parameter doesn't need to be a revision number: there are three permitted keywords - prev, next and cur.

&diff=prev displays the revision specified by &oldid=, and the diff shown at the top is a comparison of that revision with the previous revision.

&diff=next displays the revision after the one specified by &oldid=, and the diff shown at the top is a comparison of those two consecutive revisions.

&diff=cur displays the current version; the diff shown at the top is a comparison of the current version with that specified by &oldid= - it can be any revision from the page history.

Since

• http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3ATestcases_page_header&oldid=625450950

and

• http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3ATestcases_page_header&oldid=629082496

are consecutive revisions of the same page, and 629082496 is the current version, this means that the following are all equivalent:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3ATestcases_page_header&diff=629082496
• http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3ATestcases_page_header&diff=629082496&oldid=625450950
• http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3ATestcases_page_header&diff=prev&oldid=629082496
• http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3ATestcases_page_header&diff=next&oldid=625450950
• http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3ATestcases_page_header&diff=cur&oldid=625450950

As soon as another edit is made to the page, that last one will become different from the others. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:46, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Once again, Redrose64, you make a complicated subject understandable; thank you very much for that! It appears that the bottom line is that in the future, I just have to be more careful with the terms in the Diff template. Joys! – Paine  03:53, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

If you're using the {{diff}} template, this takes four parameters. The first one is the page name; the second and third correspond with the &diff= and &oldid= parameters as described above, except that they need to appear in that order; and the fourth is the link text. So the last four examples given above become

• {{diff|Template:Testcases page header|629082496|625450950|Example 2}} → Example 2
• {{diff|Template:Testcases page header|prev|629082496|Example 3}} → Example 3
• {{diff|Template:Testcases page header|next|625450950|Example 4}} → Example 4
• {{diff|Template:Testcases page header|cur|625450950|Example 5}} → Example 5

--Redrose64 (talk) 11:15, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much! – Paine  10:20, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Article was rejected due to someone else's post from the same URL being inappropriate

Please can you advise whether the request needs to be resubmitted, the articles that were posted by 'TheApprenticeNetwork' are unrelated to this post and were posted by someone else.

87.82.210.210 (talk) 15:05, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I have no idea what this is about nor why you came to my talk page. I would like to help, but you have not given me enough information. If you help me by doing that, then maybe I will be able to help you. So, can you provide more of an explanation? – Paine Ellsworth ^CLIMAX! 17:08, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

This edit request to Template:Infobox planet has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

So, a few months ago I requested the addition of Minimum Orbital Intersection Distance to Template:Infobox planet. You had asked me if I wanted anything else, and at the time I said no, but I've found a particular couple parameters have also become important; while like I said in the earlier request that we tend to care most about our own planet, the minor planet center kindly provides MOID to most of the planets, so I would like to request the parameters mercury_moid, venus_moid, mars_moid, jupiter_moid, saturn_moid, uranus_moid, and neptune_moid, should an asteroid happen to pass fairly close to one of the aforementioned planets. exoplanetaryscience (talk) 03:15, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

To editor Exoplanetaryscience:  Done – Paine  03:25, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Will you be able to revamp this template to resemble other redirect templates? --George Ho (talk) 03:22, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi again, George – Yes! that one was on my to-do list and is finished for now. And I will happily accept any ideas for its improvement. I removed some fluff from its documentation; there were abilities listed that the template hasn't had since I began to work on it in 2011, perhaps never had. I also updated Category:Redirects from subsidiary titles. Joys! – Paine  17:02, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Re:

The description for the

13:40, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi, BD2412 – when the two templates were merged, I tried to include the important content of both templates. When I compare the new with the old, I thought I did it correctly. How would you reword it, or what would you add to include the option you appear to feel has been omitted?

Old Dabconcept template

This disambiguation page should be converted into a broad-concept article, describing the primary meaning of the term. Additional meanings linked to this term should be moved to a separate page with "(disambiguation)" in the title.

New Dabprimary template

This disambiguation page is at this title because the primary topic does not yet have an article. A broad-concept article is needed that describes the primary meaning of the term. Upon creation of that article, this page should be moved to User talk:Paine Ellsworth/Archive 11 (disambiguation), and the primary topic moved to this page title.

– Paine  14:10, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Something like this:

This disambiguation page is at this title because the primary topic does not yet have an article. A broad-concept article is needed that describes the primary meaning of the term. Upon creation of that article, the current content of this page should be deleted, or if there are additional meanings, moved to User talk:Paine Ellsworth/Archive 11 (disambiguation), and the primary topic moved to this page title.

Note, for example, Genetic variance, Fried cheese, and Comment spam. These are pages that merely list subtopics of a single concept. There is no disambiguation needed at all between them, so the page should be converted without creating a separate disambiguation page. By contrast, Alien Nation has a primary topic (the franchise), but needs a disambiguation page to cover topics unrelated to this primary topic. Cheers! bd2412 T 14:25, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that does make it much clearer, thank you! Let me massage it a bit to try and make it more concise. I see three possibilities:

1. Pages like your examples that have only topics related to the primary topic,
2. Pages that only have unrelated topics, and
3. Pages that have a mixture of related and unrelated topics.

So maybe this to cover all three?:

This page title is the primary topic and needs its own article. When a broad-concept article is written that describes the primary meaning of the term, it may be moved to this page title. Unrelated topics on this page may be moved to User talk:Paine Ellsworth/Archive 11 (disambiguation), while related topics may be used in the new article.

At some point, if it's okay with you, it would be best to transfer this discussion to the Dabprimary talk page. – Paine  21:15, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Sure, go ahead. I appreciate your solution. bd2412 T 22:23, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, bd2412, and the changes have been made. – Paine  23:04, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi! Is there Rcat tool or gadget or user script I could use to make rcatting easier? :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 20:09, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi, ☺ · Salvidrim! – How many times! have I wanted such a tool, but then I would remind myself that, while some tasks beg for a gadget or bot to accomplish them, most rcatting actually requires a personal touch. A bot or script will miss the need to place an {{R from merge}} here or an {{R printworthy}} there. So I decided long ago that I would tackle rcat tagging without the use of such tools. There are some editors, I think, who use such gadgets, but I usually have to follow behind them to finish the job, because there is always something a bot or script misses. Wish I could be more helpful to you! – Paine  06:54, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

I meant more like a gizmo like Twinkle, which is user-operated but where rcatting (or stubsorting for that matter), is done using dropdowns and a GUI and whatnot, which would be immensely helpful for someone like me who is totally unfamiliar with the intricacies of the plethora of rcats. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 08:40, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

I know, but since I don't use such a gadget, then I can only suggest that until you find one, the next best things are to use the

indexes, which I am presently updating, and know that the more you work with rcats the more you will know them and the more comfortable you will be using them. – Paine

  09:05, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

A while back, you created {{WikiProject Redirect}} in a very specific way to where there would be nearly no way for an editor to "get away" with placing it on an improper talk page; if you have some free time, you think you may be able to do something similar with {{WikiProject Templates}}? I figure that you may be able to accomplish the task a lot hastier than myself, given that the edits that you did to {{WikiProject Redirect}} would be quite similar to what updates would need to be done to {{WikiProject Templates}}. Steel1943 (talk) 18:21, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

It'd be a pleasure! I read on the template, ... This particular template is especially important to the project because it is used in the maintenance of other templates. .... Can I assume that you want it made clear that only the talk pages of those templates that are used in the maintenance of other templates should hold this banner, and that no other template talk pages qualify? – Paine  19:50, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

You are correct. Just like the {{WikiProject Redirect}} template, {{WikiProject Templates}}, from what I see, should not be on pages in the "Template talk" namespace except in very rare cases. Steel1943 (talk) 20:18, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Okay, then if it's all the same to you, I would like to transfer the essential parts of this discussion to the banner's talk page, so that others will be aware of what I'm doing and may chime in with opinions and suggestions. – Paine  20:28, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

By all means. Thanks! Steel1943 (talk) 20:39, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Re: RfC...

I only just got pointed at this, and wanted to say thanks for your comments there.

To be honest, it's probably just-as well I missed the RfC when open. Comments about an "archive" being uncurated could-well have prompted me to resort to my 'weapons-grade' vocabulary. I truly cannot understand people thinking historical records of what was known at a point in time should be updated. To be fatuous, over on Wikinews we leave Ministry of Truth duties to Wikipedia.

We've had a few new people pop up on Wikinews, and the great-big warning you get if editing an article published over 24 hours ago is completely ignored. It's painful having to revert well-intentioned edits because the audience for a story when fresh have moved on.

I've been editing on Wikiews for about nine years now, so I consider myself unqualified to critique warnings, and how-comprehendible policy documents might be to folks more-used to editing here. Given you've obviously got it about a news archive not being "curated", and aren't currently a Wikinews contributor, could you look at a few things and give some constructive criticism? The obvious is the warning if you click edit on an article published a couple of days ago; and, the automatic user talk welcome template. --Brian McNeil /^talk 04:17, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Brian – thank you for coming! I wish I had thought to raise your specific points above at that RfC. It looks like it did the trick, though, because the template has been switched to show Wikinews by default. I'll be happy to look at the items you asked, and I'll let you know what I find. Joys! – Paine  19:58, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Well Brian, this has been and still is, for me, quite a learning experience! Even the term "editor" has a tighter meaning on WN, perhaps equivalent to "administrator" on WP? I looked at my own WN talk page Welcome message, which should be up-to-date since it is transcluded (rather than substituted like here on WP). That is a rather complicated message with lots of good info. I think I would give it a light bg color rather than it's present transparent state. It brought up questions about transclusion and substitution that WN does not appear to have project nor help pages that would make template usage better-defined. For example, see n:Help:What links here#Cases of transclusion where it is red-linked.

The notice you mention – is that n:Template:Editintro notcurrent? That appears to be the only diff between a new article and an older one. The "some time ago" in the initial "caution" statement threw me:

Caution! You are about to change a Wikinews article published some time ago.

I found that in an article that was published yesterday, 15 Dec. To me, "some time ago" means more than just "some time in the past". It rather means "quite some time ago" or "some time in the distant past". That should probably be edited to:

Caution! You are about to change a Wikinews article published on a previous date.

...or even better, if WN has a template that can supply the actual publication date:

Caution! You are about to change a Wikinews article published on (date of publication).

The rest of the info seems fine for now.

I was deeply impressed by how much better WN is now compared with how it appeared back in early 2011 when I first logged in. For example, WN's project page n:Wikinews:Reviewing articles, and especially its collaboration page (I do like that word as the phrase emits so much more meaning than "talk page" or "discussion page".) impressed me because they show that there are several concerned contributors with interesting opinions. They show that people are at work in an ongoing effort to improve WN.

Myself, I've done some writing, but when it comes to news, I've always been more about "reading" it rather than professionally writing it. And that is why it might be so difficult to recruit good journalists, perhaps from the student population and the retired ranks. There are so few as compared with the rest of us, the vast majority of people would probably rather read the news than report and write it.

I suppose that, just like here on WP, it is important to balance between attraction of new writers/editors and retention of present ones. That is never an easy job. The new article review process should be designed to get easier and easier as a journalist earns respect for her or his work. However, even the best journalists must always answer to that hard-nosed, overworked editor and, when the article is "front page" material, that group of higher-ups who determine what does and does not go on the front page. On WN this difficult balance is made even harder by the fact that contributors, rather than being professionally paid for their work, are volunteers. That must be one of the hardest balancing acts there is.

I hope I've been of some help – please feel free to hit me with other specific items for critique. – Paine 

Hello, Paine Ellsworth. You have new messages at Debresser's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

To editor Technical 13: You've made a lot of edits to my work page archive, and I thank you very much for them. Unfortunately, the page is broken again in the same manner as before, the same as in the screenshot I uploaded. If you go back to the diff just before your first edit to the page, just after Jack's, there is no page width stretching. While your first edit did not break anything (it looked okay until your second set of edits), it's diff seems to show that it is broken. So I have no idea exactly what broke the page again, but it was in that second set of edits you made. – Paine  21:49, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

• PE, if you scroll over, and then down to where the line of text is that is stretching it out, what is the text that you see there. That will help me narrow down where the glitch is. Thanks. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 22:56, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

To editor Technical 13: I was just doing some checks without logging in, and I thought I'd check my archive page at the diff of your final edit. The page was stretched. Not being near the technical level you have, I wondered if placing the code you used in the MW common.css would also affect how unregistered users and registered users who are not logged in could view a page? Would pages appear normal for them, too? or would they look broken to them? – Paine  16:19, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

• It would fix it for them too. It's a patch for everyone that views the site. I'd coordinate with Edokter as he's usually my go to guy for css (on the rare case I can't figure it out on my own), and would know the best way to implement it properly.  :) — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 16:42, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Okay, that sounds like a good idea! Good luck with it, and let me know if I can be of service. Joys! – Paine 

Thank you.

Pleasure!

Best wishes to you and yours for happy holidays and a prosperous 2015. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:12, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

and thank you right back! Joys! – Paine 

Hi! Re this spooky cave: the removal was on purpose; here comes the explanation I was too lazy to type out.

• Category:Anthropology is not needed because the article is already indirectly categorized under Category:Anthropology (Anthropology-->Paleoanthropology-->Paleoanthropological sites), and Anthropology is a really broad category anyways.

• WP:Set category than a topic category; the cat could be used as a topic cat, but it would make it harder to find articles about actual hominin fossils and it would duplicate Category:Paleoanthropological sites
  (of which Mugharet el-Zuttiyeh‎ is already a member of).

Is that ok with you? Let me know what you think! Cheers, jonkerz ♠talk 02:43, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

That all makes sense to me, so I've restored your edit. This will be a handy reference in case someone else challenges it. Joys and Happy Holidays to you and yours! – Paine  03:03, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Joys and Happy Holidays to you and yours, too! :) jonkerz ♠talk 03:23, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

To you and yours

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 14:49, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, FWiW Bzuk; Joys and Happy Holidays to you and yours, too! – Paine  23:09, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

		Happy Holiday Cheer!
		Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings! Joys! Hafspajen (talk ) 01:52, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, Hafspajen! and Joys 'n Happy Holidays to you and yours, too! – Paine 

Just a clarification: According to the infobox policy, the alias field is for alternate names used professionally and not covered elsewhere in the infobox. The infobox is titled "U;Nee". Putting "U;Nee" in the alias field is redundant. It's like saying "U;Nee, also known as U;Nee." If the infobox was titled with her birth name, then it would be appropriate to put her stage name elsewhere in the infobox. I researched this quite thoroughly before making these edits. Thank you for being so civil in your edit summary. You are just about the only wikipedia kpop editor who seems to bother with any communication at all! Shinyang-i (talk) 14:51, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

To editor Shinyang-i: Okay, yes, I see it now. It's the phrase "...other than the name in the |name= parameter," that I missed. Joys and Happy Holidays to you and yours! – Paine 

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015!!!

Hello Paine Ellsworth, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2015. Happy editing, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:01, 25 December 2014 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of {{U|Technical 13}} to all registered users whom have commented on his talk page. To prevent receiving future messages, please follow the opt-out instructions on User:Technical 13/Holiday list

HI there. I was wondering why you created redirects for the pages "Debt.com" and "Consolidated Credit" and turned them back into drafts. I had moved them over to article status. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeparsley (talk • contribs) 22:52, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

To editor Jeparsley: Mostly a judgement call; I may have been wrong. I came across those because they populated a category I monitor, Category:Pages with templates in the wrong namespace. They both had templates on them that were not meant for article mainspace. Since no one else had removed those templates, I concluded that they had been moved to article namespace prematurely, so I moved them back to draftspace. If you feel they are ready to "go live" in mainspace, then there should be a procedure in place for you to do so. Apologies if this was an inconvenience for you. Joys and Happy Holidays to you and yours! – Paine  23:35, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. Yes I do believe they are ready to go live, Now how do I remove the redirect that you created back to he draft page? Or is there something else I am supposed to do? Jeparsley (talk) 13:14, 30 December 2014 (UTC)Jason

Jason, I have tagged your help request with an {{admin help}} template to try to speed things along for you. Hope this helps! – Paine  10:44, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

I have to disagree with

notability and "having their name mentioned in passing". Draft:Consolidated Credit is slightly better since at least the CreditCards.com page is about the company itself, but it's still borderline at best. I'll delete the redirects, but I'd strongly advise against turning at least Draft:Debt.com live in its current state. Huon (talk

) 11:31, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

I see the redirects have been deleted already, but I'd strongly advise Jason not to move those drafts himself but to make use of the review process and, if at all possible, to improve the references to give a better indication that the organizations have been the subjects of significant third-party coverage. Huon (talk) 12:21, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

I have not kept up with the new-article creation process, so I definitely go along with editor Huon and suggest, Jason, that you read his words carefully. There's no sense in moving those articles to mainspace prematurely just to have someone come along and delete them or suggest they be speedily deleted. Joys! – Paine  14:28, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

PS. And, Huon, we wish you and yours a Happy and Prosperous New Year! – PS left by – Paine 

Happy New Year!

Paine Ellsworth,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Hafspajen (talk) 10:21, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2015}} to user talk pages.

And a Joyous 'n Prosperous New Year right back atcha, Hafspajen! – Paine  10:29, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Paine Ellsworth,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:26, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2015}} to user talk pages.

Thank you very much, Iryna Harpy! We wish a Joyous and Happy New Year to you and yours, too! – Paine  01:38, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Dear Paine Ellsworth,
HAPPY NEW YEAR Hoping 2015 will be a great year for you! Thank you for your contributions!
From a fellow editor,
--FWiW Bzuk (talk)

This message promotes

WikiLove. Originally created by Nahnah4

(see "invisible note").

And a Joyous and Happy New Year to you and yours, FWiW Bzuk! – Paine 

Something in the convoluted mess that is {{

 Fixed, Anomie⚔, and Happy New Year to you 'n yours! – Paine  16:52, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Dear Paine Ellsworth,
HAPPY NEW YEAR!!! Thank you for the kind thoughts and for your work. Last year was a hard one, both physically, thanks to medical ailments, and on Wikipedia, thanks to a plethora of Wikitrolls. Colleagues like you make staying here worthwhile. Here's to a better year to all!
--Tenebrae (talk) 22:38, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much for these nice thoughts, Tenebrae, and we hope you and yours enjoy a Prosperous, Healthy and Happy New Year, too! – Paine  23:18, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

I removed it because he isn't a free agent anymore. I am using the free agent categories to update old articles. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 21:40, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) That's cool; however, it's better to answer on the player's talk page where I asked the question, so I will copy this to that page. – Paine  21:47, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Now the articles titled "Free Agent" and "Free agent" all seem to be in one category. Also now the old ones titled as Free Agent in the source code now display the properly better capitalized Free agent. Thanks for your help. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 21:44, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Pleasure! – Paine 

Just for the record, the articles currently titled as "Free agent" in the source code used to not have their own category and did not appear in the Free Agent category because of the different spellings, Now they are all one. Thanks again. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 21:54, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it just took a little change (parser function) to the header code. Getting them all into one cat was easy. It took awhile to figure out just where to place the parser function. Good catch! – Paine 

FYI

ibox code a little more concise after noting that all those parameters were inside a "switch" function. So only one instance of the category name is needed. – Paine

  23:55, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

What do you mean only one instance is needed. Sry lol WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 00:01, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

When the switch function is used, any parameters that are not specified as equal (=) to something will be equal to whatever the next parameter that is specified as equal to something is equal to. For example, in:

• {{#switch: {{{currentteam}}}|Free Agent|Free agent|free agent=[[(category name)]]

...all three capitalizations will populate the category to which "free agent" is equal. – Paine  00:23, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your time. I have seen "free agent" used a few times so that is helpful. Having all of the variations in one cat is a huge help. Having their titles changed to "Free agent" is good too because that is actually the proper capitalization (basketball players use "Free agent" and two word positions don't capitalize the second word, see Julio Jones "Wide receiver") There used to be so many outdated articles. Free agents who haven't played in ten years. Not even joking lol. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 00:33, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

And again, it's a pleasure to help! I love to edit templates, and iboxes are usually a good challenge for me. Happy editing and New Year! – Paine  08:30, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I know that Technical 13 bangs on about other people's signatures - I don't know if they've mentioned it, but your signature seems to contain unexpanded parser functions, contrary to

<span style="font-family:{{#if: |{{{font}}}|sans-serif}};font-size:{{#if: 118% |118%|100%}};color:{{#if: blue |blue|black}};background-color:{{#if: |{{{bgcolor}}}|transparent}};{{#if: |title:{{{title}}}|}};{{#if: |{{{css}}}|}}">{{#if: |{{{1}}}|[[User talk:Paine Ellsworth|C<small style="font-size:85%;">LIMAX</small>!]]}}</span>

<span style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:118%;color:blue;background-color:transparent;;">[[User talk:Paine Ellsworth|C<small style="font-size:85%;">LIMAX</small>!]]</span>

Hi, Redrose64 – yes, and thank you! See if this isn't better:

• – Paine Ellsworth^CLIMAX!

That's hot off the ~~~ oven. – Paine  21:37, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Neither of them have parser functions, so that's good. The second of these is 159 characters of code, so is OK; the first is 297 characters, so is still on the long side. You can cut that down by using the following techniques:

• replace – with the actual – character, which saves 6 characters

Setting a font-size on a <small> nullifies the tag, so the styling might as well be on the next element in, so

• move the font-size:85%; from the first <small> to the next <span>, remove the <small style=""> and matching </small>, which saves 24 chars

when a <span>...</span> is inside another element, consider merging them:

• change the first <span>...</span> to <b>...</b> and remove the triple apostrophes that enclose the link, saving 12 chars

This gives

• – Paine Ellsworth^CLIMAX!

which looks just the same but is 255 characters of code. You can save six more chars: remove the space immediately before font-family; remove the last semicolon from each of the three style="..." attributes; alter the remaining <small>...</small> pair to <span>...</span> so I think that 249 is possible. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:49, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

How about now? – Paine Ellsworth^CLIMAX! 23:00, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Fine, 250 exactly (I miscounted the semicolons). --Redrose64 (talk) 00:03, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Cool! and again, thank you! – Paine  06:58, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Sorry for harassing you but it is possible to make a category with articles that have the |currentteam parameter blank in the NFL infobox. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 02:28, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

To editor

template sandbox, if a category titled Category:NFL empty or missing currentteam parameter articles were to be created and set equal to the #default= parameter, any NFL player ibox that has either an empty or missing currentteam param would populate that category. Have you come across a lot of these? Do most of the coaches show a current team? Also, what about those players that still have {{Infobox gridiron football person}} in their articles and are now either coaching or playing in the pros? I'm really no sports expert, so forgive me if my questions show my ignorance. – Paine

  06:55, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Thx, there are a lot of free agents that do not have anything listed in the |currentteam param. Additionaly, there are many former players that still have the currentteam in their infobox. Also, ignore that merge thing on the gridiron person, it was pretty much a mistake. The gridiron person is used for most Canadian Football League players. Also, some coaches use the NFL coach infobox and I think they all show a currentteam. If you make the currentteam empty category don't have the instances appear as "Free agent." There are many former players with a blank currentteam. Also, I don't want the ones that have a missing currentteam categorized. All former players have their currentteam parameter removed, ex. Jerry Rice. Thx WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 14:55, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Okay, I've altered the

template testcases

page shows him as a coach. I'm not sure if his article needs to be updated, or if someone just used his testcases infobox to test the coaching parameters. Even if there are coaches that don't have a currentteam parameter in their infobox it should be okay, because when I tested the sandbox, the only time the empty category is populated is when the currentteam param is empty. If the currentteam param is missing, then nothing happens and no category is populated.

If you would like to test this yourself, you can't use the testcases page because it suppresses the categories. You have to go to an article like Joe Adams (wide receiver) and use his infobox (only to click Show preview). Just change the ibox name to Infobox NFL player/sandbox. That way you can preview your edits, and each time you make a change you'll see what happens to the categories at the bottom of the page. On the other hand, if you're ready to "go live" now, let me know and I'll proceed. – Paine 

The one above the Earl McCullouch, Renaldo Nehemiah also has coach stuff. These are just tests/examples. You can make it live if you want now. Thanks WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 18:09, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

 Done – Paine  18:36, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, pretty sure that's everything. This is a big help once again lol. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 19:02, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Pleasure! – Paine 

To editor

Yeah, Retired isn't supposed to be in the infobox, thanks though. I am putting the category back in the infobox. It is used to remove "Retired" from articles. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 15:42, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Hey thanks for the revision on

—

TALK_CONT

) 22:58, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

No problemo,

Lightgodsy – we've all made mistakes like that, in fact, I made the very same mistake about red links in the beginning. As for how much info in a section, from what I've read only a brief summary of the subject is usually desired and from what I've seen, that summary is usually just a single brief paragraph. Since the Good faith article begins with its usage in both philosophy and law, I would say that the article badly needs a section on the philosophy aspect. There is a very brief treatment of the subject of section expansion on the documentation page of the {{Main}} template. Joys! – Paine

  01:16, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Rfdm template

I suggest the best place for this to be discussed is at

WP:RFD. Si Trew (talk

) 21:18, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

If the "this" to which you allude is the discussion at Template talk:This is a redirect, and if RFD is a place to disposition redirects, then how do you figure? Why not give me time to address your concerns? The template has been around for a long, long time, and I have worked on it for a long time, so let me get back to your concerns on that talk page and see if I can't shed some light on this for you. – Paine Ellsworth^CLIMAX! 02:16, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, I've done it now

Thanks, I've tried again and just put the square brackets around something less ambiguous as you suggested and it's worked. Thanks for all your help Zinedine Socrates (talk) 00:03, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Colombus

Paine, why did you think the picture added by User:Crisco 1492 was inferior? Is it because of the frame?

The picture is at the Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Christopher Columbus right now. The file you reverted to is only 1,603 × 1,928 pixels -so that couldn't possibly be nominated as a Featured picture. Those must be minimum 1500pxX 1500px, that is a requirement. It is also in PNG, and artificially lightened. My guess is that you have issues with the frame, right? But if we cropp that, would it be OK to have the other one? That one is comming directly from the museum, it is 4,390 × 5,325 pixels, file size: 8.11 MB -and has a better, much higher resolution and colors. What do you think. Hafspajen (talk) 18:25, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Hafspajen – Yes, the frame was part of it, though a small part. My main concern was the inferior contrast. The FP candidate is darker and there is less contrast between lights and darks. I pulled up both files side by side. If you do the same, I really don't see how you or anyone would call the FP file superior (just to look at them). If one could get the contrasts equal, then even the frame would become a non-issue. Joys! – Paine  18:45, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

• The different Christopher Columbus
• 
• 

• Well, I think it has to do a little bit with the Wikipedia:Featured picture criteria. More extensive manipulation should be clearly described in the image text... and Any manipulation which causes the main subject to be misrepresented is unacceptable.

• File:Christopher Columbus.PNG is artificially lightened. And there is an other thing. While at thumb size they look almost the same, they are not the same if enlarged. The File:Christopher Columbus.PNG is blurry, it looked at at high resolution. While File:Portrait of a Man, Said to be Christopher Columbus.jpg is clearer, you can check click on it when enlarged, you can notice the brus-strokes clearly on the sleaves and shirt, for example. The other one has only a flat white field of color. It is this kind of differences we use to look at Featured pictures. Maybe
  CorinneSD or Crisco 1492 can explain it better than I do. Hafspajen (talk
  ) 19:14, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Well, I don't know what to say, except that I know what I like, and in my opinion, just to look at the two images side-by-side like that, the image on the right above is superior in terms of contrast and lighting. I have spent a few hours on the left image in my Corel, retained the hi-res and despeckled a bit, but I suppose there is no use in uploading that one if "artificially lightened" leads to "misrepresentation" of Columbus. Personally, I don't think better quality lighting misrepresents, but indeed enhances the subject. I would guess that to most readers of Wikipedia, the image on the left above, while it may have achieved FP status, is still inferior to the image on the right, which is the status quo image for the article on Columbus. Feel free to begin a discussion on his talk page to see what others think. – Paine  21:05, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I understand how you think. However if nominated, the image to the right would not satisfy the voters on FP. Because the image dosn't look like its source. I can post that beside the other as an alt... just to check what they say, if you want. Hafspajen (talk) 21:12, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

As one who is more concerned with what WP readers might want over what expert FP voters would like, it might be better for Crisco 1492 to launch an RfC on the Columbus talk page. I have left a comment at the candidate page. – Paine  21:44, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

OK. Hafspajen (talk) 23:08, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

To editors Hafspajen, Crisco 1492 and P. S. Burton: I've invited you to my talk page to compare the three images of the great Christopher Columbus (well, believed to be him).

The Different Christopher Columbus

• 
  1
• 
  2
• 
  3

1. File:Portrait of a Man, Said to be Christopher Columbus.jpg
2. File:Portrait of a Man, Said to be Christopher Columbus_2.jpg
3. File:Christopher Columbus.PNG

I just added the middle image to his article in hopes that we will all agree that it is the best rendition of the 1519 portrait. Thank you for coming. – Paine  17:15, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

• The middle image is, IMHO, the right direction, but a bit too far — Crisco 1492 (talk) 17:51, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! I take that as a huge compliment. When I started over from scratch, one of my concerns was the collar. At first everything I did overwhitened it. So it was a great learning experience for me, and I am sorry if I took it a bit too far due to overfocusing on keeping the collar's textured appearance. – Paine  18:12, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

To editor Crisco 1492: Also, please take into consideration that this is still essentially your image. So of course you may do with it as you see fit. I came in at the last minute and made a few minor alterations, so if there is any credit for it, you definitely should get all of it. – Paine 

All the rest of the template:infobox planet stuff

I've been looking for a number of other changes for template:infobox planet but I figured that requesting so many changes separately would seem kind of like I'm trying to make your work hard so I delayed until now. Here are a few of the changes I've been looking for for a while.

After epoch (see source code)

| data23 = | label24 = Observation arc length | data24 =

--several sections later--

| label51 = Distance from the Sun | data51 =

exoplanetaryscience (talk) 23:59, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

To editor Exoplanetaryscience: There is aphelion, perihelion and sm axis, so why does the template need "distance from the Sun"? If the ibox is in a planet's satellite article, isn't its distance from the Sun easily found in the primary's ibox? – Paine Ellsworth^CLIMAX! 17:54, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

My purpose for current distance from Sun was mainly made for a number of objects in the Solar System that have large eccentricities, and as such vary quite largely in their distance from the Sun over time. It was so that I could know whether objects such as 20461 Dioretsa are 2 astronomical units, or 45 astronomical units from the sun, or somewhere in between (it's actually currently ~26.8 AU from the sun) so the purpose of the option was to tell the current distance, not available from the JPL small-body database, where most orbits are taken from, but can be found at many places such as AstDyS or Celestia. exoplanetaryscience (talk) 21:27, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Okay, it's in the sandbox, so if that is what you want, let me know or change it. I called the 2nd addition "Current distance from sun" with data "distance_from_sun". Questions do arise as to who will keep up with the changes and how – and also what happens if that editor leaves Wikipedia? (I'm not crazy about these timliness items that quickly or relatively quickly become dated). – Paine  23:31, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Well frankly most of the parameters in infobox planet are changing things, as perturbations can change any of the six orbital elements, along with orbital precession constantly changing longitude of ascending node, and mean anomaly constantly changing on epoch. Aside from that, apparent magnitude is ever-changing. That is the purpose of the epoch inclusion, to indicate the orbital elements at a specific date, usually near that of the last update to the article. As such, like magnitude, the distance from the sun would be expected to roughly coincide with the given epoch, unless specified.

Another topic I think I should touch on regarding current distance, is that some objects in infobox planet aren't necessarily orbiting the Sun, which might be an issue, but there is of course the option of simply not including it.

Also, I made the edits to your sandbox draft that I wanted to correct. exoplanetaryscience (talk) 00:46, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

So I'll feel more comfortable (from a technical standpoint), I've sought the counsel of other template editors on the Ibox talk page. Feel free to comment there. Joys! – Paine  03:44, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Okay, exoplanetaryscience, I have included Uncertainty and Observation arc length in the ibox, so this is partially done. Other editors didn't seem to feel that the ibox is ready, yet, for a Current distance from the Sun parameter, so you might want to see if you can encourage them a bit. Joys! – Paine  17:49, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Template

Hi. Could you have a look at the {{Thomas Paine}} template when you have some time, I've added quite a few items but don't totally know if I got them right chronologically or in the right sections, and you may know of more pages to add. It would be nice to really submerge myself in his work for awhile, I've never done that so I don't have a decent mental map of the subject (such as when he was actively in the National Convention and when he was absent due to imprisonment and other folly. Interesting he escaped death just because the guy chalked the wrong side of the door!). Thanks, and it's been nice meeting you around the town square here. Randy Kryn 3:42 31 January, 2015 (UTC)

Looks very good, Randy Kryn. Perhaps consider linking to Deism in the Related section. Evidently you already know not to use redirects in Navbar templates. Maybe the image could be a little smaller so as not to underemphasize the rest of the Navbar. I like it. Maybe pick up a few more links while reading his articles. He is one of my favorite historic characters. – Paine  11:04, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, and have added your suggestions. Yes, he is one I'll study more. I've never read "Common Sense" (or seem to have any at times), unless I was 'made to' in high school and have no memory of it. No family articles that I can see. Hopefully a few more pages will turn up which are 'template worthy' (I just removed a popular culture item from the 'Foley Square' page because it concerned the filming of an advertisement, with the comment that it wasn't 'Popular culture worthy'). If the template gets better maybe you'd consider bringing it out of the navbox stack on the Paine page (most bio pages I've seen with subject templates have them 'popped out' of navbox stacks, if those stacks exist). I'll keep looking for more pages, and in the process accidently educate myself, which is one of the better things about liking/working on templates. Haven't said it before, and will just say it once so as not to flatter, but your signature is one of the better ones I've seen on Wikipedia so thank you for that too. Now, back to the coal mine. Randy Kryn 13:40 31 January, 2015 (UTC)

The Common Sense pamphlet can now be found in libraries in very small book form. I tell you that because you might want to get a copy in order to feel the full effect of Paine's jarring words. I've read it twice, but the first time I was left wondering how it could have had such a widespread effect on people. Then I read more about it and realized that I had to read it again, this time imagining that I was a literate storekeeper in a small village. It was a beautiful evening in early Spring, and I had gathered together the people in the village and from the surrounding farms in front of my store. Most of those people had not been taught to read, so I stood on the boardwalk and read to them Paine's brief but powerful polemic against monarchy, in general, and the British monarchy, in particular. In my imaginings, the effect on those people was immediate. Those who had been on the fence about fighting for freedom jumped down and joined the rest, who wanted independence, but who had not felt they were part of a larger whole. That type of response happened all over the colonies. After that second reading of the pamphlet, I was able to get a glimpse into what those people must have felt. I'm certain there were other factors that led our ancestors into the war of freedom from tyranny; however, Paine's little pamphlet was the "straw that broke the camel's back". Joys! – Paine  19:27, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Well you sure make it come alive! I'm glad I haven't read it yet, and will do so with your experience in mind. That's how I watch many older movies, pre-1940, pretending I'm of the era and seeing it in a theater. The depression events of the 1930s were countered by many "Be happy, money means nothing" movies, dancing Shirley Temple around the screen, the timing of the Marx Brothers entering into 'talkies' just when they were needed, not to mention King Kong coming at ya (after seeing that fellow a couple of missed meals didn't seem so bad). Recently, during an italics run, I came across the page What Is the Third Estate?, read and researched it for awhile, and, after realizing it was probably the French Revolutions' equivalent pamphlet to Common Sense (or close enough for comfort), went and popped it into the appropriate place on the French Revolution template. Italic runs contain things like that more often than not. Thanks for your insights. Question, are you by any chance going to Selma for the 50th anniversary of the Selma to Montgomery march? I think a few Wikipedia editors might show up there. Randy Kryn 11:58 1 February (Super Bowl Sunday), 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for complements and for asking about travel to Selma! These days my health allows only minimum journeys outside my home, so I can visit such celebrations in spirit, if not otherwise. Joys! – Paine 

Ochre

The Ochre article has a tag for American English, yet you have made changes for British spelling. Which should it be?--DThomsen8 (talk) 15:37, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

WikiGnomes like me ask such questions, and invite editors like you to join the WikiGnome cabal.--DThomsen8 (talk) 15:42, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

When I come across articles that are tagged per

WP:ENGVAR with the American or British spelling notice, I don't usually check into the history of the article. At the time I made those changes, and even up until today, the edit screen for the article still had the British spelling notice at the top. The editor who reverted my spelling changes, PaleAqua, noted that the article stub had been begun in American English. That editor also placed the American English notice on the talk page, but was apparently unable for some reason to change the edit notice for article edits. I checked the stub article, which was started with this edit

and found that the reverter was correct. I just now converted the edit notice from British to American spelling. So PaleAqua's reverts of my spelling changes were correct, and the article is written in the American spelling variation.

Thank you for the invite to join! I've been a gnome for most of my edits, and basically like very much to make improvements in the background, such as to redirects, dab pages and templates, all of which have WikiProjects that I have joined. Joys! – Paine  18:23, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the fix to the edit notice. I never got around to getting template editor so can't edit edit notices myself. PaleAqua (talk) 19:26, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

It's a pleasure, PaleAqua, and that's easy enough to fix. Just a quick read of the granting guidelines, and then go to this page to get the user right granted. Piece o' cake – upside down. – Paine 

I'm kinda aware of the requirements for template editor as I helped suggest them :) but like being a wikisloth and getting that bit would encourage me to do more template work than I have the long term energy for. Already burnt out once, going slow this time. PaleAqua (talk) 20:46, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Got it. Joys! – Paine 

Email notice

Nope, didn't send, and got reverted back to my account. Either the Wikipedia coding is off or ghosts in the machine. Randy Kryn 20:44 1 February, 2015 (UTC)

Curious. Try sending directly to starswirler at aol.com – (I'm an astronomy lover.) – Paine 

Nope, this was copied off my failure notice saying it's a permanent error: [email protected] (and you best delete this entire section before the roaming net bots grab it for spam purposes) Randy Kryn 20:54 1 February, 2015 (UTC)

No worries. I still get email there, and good spam filters take care of the web spiders. – Paine 

Hello Paine, and

John Cline (talk

) 23:24, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, John, that was all very enlightening! Thank you very much! – Paine 

Joseph Conrad

Hi, Paine -- I just wonder what your feeling is regarding the need for a comma after a short prepositional phrase at the beginning of a sentence. I think that when it's a two-word prepositional phrase, or "in" or "on" with a date, unless there is a special need for clarity, a comma is not needed. If it's a date in the American style, with the year, the second comma is needed, but if it's in the British style, I don't think a comma is always needed. I've been discussing this with Rothorpe at

talk

) 19:22, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi,

CorinneSD – I may be the wrong person to ask, because I actually loathe commas even when they should be used. Generally, though, and especially when I edit, I try to be more objective, (darn, just LOOK at all those dern commas ) so I think about whether a pause is natural or not, if the leading prepositional phrase is more or less than four words, and so on. The edit you use as an example is just a bit iffy; however, I would probably side with the admin just to keep the sentence as clear as possible. I could be wrong. Joys! – Paine

 

Thanks for your thoughts. I use commas only when really needed (but I know that's often a subjective decision). In the example, I would not use a comma. It now totals six commas in a not particularly long sentence. But I hesitate to argue with an admin.

talk

) 01:54, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Arguing is never a good thing, and yet admins are people, too, and the vast majority I've met are very nice people and would gladly share their thoughts with you, even about the smallest things, such as those tiny full stops with tails. Just a thought. – Paine 

Thanks, Paine. I'll give it some thought.

talk

) 23:50, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.